Attitudes of conbehavior


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Attitudes of conbehavior

  1. 1. Attitudes and Alternative Evaluation p.n.l Consumer Behavior
  2. 2. Topic Highlights         Definition of Attitudes Why Do We Hold Attitudes? How Are Attitudes Formed? The Components of Attitude The Attitude-Behavior Relationship Alternative Evaluation Multiattribute Attitude Models Noncompensatory Decision Rules
  3. 3. Attitude: Definition  An attitude is a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner with respect to a given object
  4. 4. Functions:Why Do We Hold Attitudes?  Utilitarian Function: We form positive attitudes towards products that give us “pleasure” and negative towards ones that give us “pain.”  Value-expressive Function: A product attitude is based on what we think that attitude says about us. The attitude is a function of our self-concept.  Ego-defensive Function: Our product attitudes are a result of us “protecting” ourselves from psychological threats.  Knowledge Function: Product attitudes are formed as a result of our need for order, structure, and meaning.
  5. 5. Forming Attitudes   Theory of Cognitive Dissonance Self-Perception Theory   Can behavior influence attitudes? Social Judgment Theory  Latitudes of Acceptance and Rejection   Assimilation Effect Contrast Effect
  6. 6. Forming Attitudes (contd.)  Balance Theory  Triads contain:    (1) A Person and His or Her Perception of; (2) an Attitude Object and; (3) Some Other Person or Object Balanced Unit Relation (like belief – element “belongs” to another) Sentiment Relation (like affect – preference for element)
  7. 7. Application of Balance Theory
  8. 8. Traditional View of Attitude ATTITUDE Cognitive Component (Beliefs) Affective Component (Feelings) Conative Component (Behavioral Intentions)
  9. 9. Attitude Effects
  10. 10. Alternative View of Attitude Beliefs Feelings Attitude Behavioral Intention Behavior
  11. 11. Predictive Vs. Diagnostic Power Weaker Stronger Beliefs Feelings Attitude Stronger Weaker Behavioral Intention Predictive Power Diagnostic Power Behavior
  12. 12. The Attitude-Behavior Relationship  LaPiere (1934)    Traveled with Chinese graduate student around the country one summer Concluded that attitudes do not influence behavior Wicker (1969)   Meta-analysis of 33 studies Concluded that attitude-behavior relationship is, at best, weak
  13. 13. Explanations for this Evidence  Lack of Correspondence in Levels of Specificity     Action, Target, Time, Context Time Interval Social Influences Other Nonattitudinal Influences
  14. 14. Correspondence in Levels of Specificity  Action Component   Attitude measurement and behavior measurement should correspond in terms of action Target Component  Attitude measure and behavior measure should be as specific as each other in terms of target
  15. 15. Correspondence in Levels of Specificity (contd.)  Time Component   If time frame for completion of behavior is relevant, it should be included in measure of attitude Context Component  If the context within which a behavior is performed is relevant, it should be considered in the measure of attitude
  16. 16. Explantions for Evidence on Attitude-Behavior Relationship   Correspondence in Levels of Specificity Time Interval   Social Influences   The closer in time the measurement of attitude and the measurement of behavior, the higher will be the relationship Reference groups may influence your behavior in a certain direction irrespective of attitude Other Nonattitudinal Influences  Financial constraints, environmental constraints, etc.
  17. 17. Determining the Choice Set All Possible Choice Alternatives Evoked Set Inept Set Alternatives known to the consumer Alternatives unknown to the consumer Consideration Set Inert Set Alternatives considered during decision making Alternatives not considered during decision making Brand Purchased Brands considered but not purchased
  18. 18. The Alternative Evaluation Process Determine Evaluative Criteria Determine Choice Alternatives Assess Performance of Alternatives Apply Decision Rule
  19. 19. Compensatory Decision Rules  Multi-Attribute (Expectancy-Value) Models   Consider the determinants or factors that underlie evaluation or attitude In general, we like (have favorable attitude towards) objects we associate with “good attributes” and develop unfavorable feelings towards objects we associate with “bad attributes”
  20. 20. A Multi-Attribute Model Department Store Wide Selection Low Price High Quality  If we can estimate   Probablity (attribute), and Value (attribute) Convenient Locations Then we should be able to predict a person’s evaluation of the object (department store)
  21. 21. Types of Multiattribute Models  Fishbein Model Ao=Σbiei n i=1  Ideal Point Model Ao=ΣWi|Ii-Xi| n i=1 Where: Ao=Attitude towards object bi=Belief that object possesses attribute i ei=Evaluation of attribute i n=Number of salient attributes Wi=Importance weight of attribute i Ii=Ideal point for attribute i Xi=Performance of brand X on attribute i
  22. 22. Evaluation Measures Evaluation (ei): A store with a wide selection of products is: good ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ bad +3 0 -3 A store with low prices is: good ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ bad +3 0 -3
  23. 23. Belief Measures Belief (bi): Store X has a wide selection of products is: likely ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ unlikely +3 0 -3 Store X has low prices is: probable ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ improbable +3 0 -3
  24. 24. A Multiattribute Evaluation Beliefs Attribute Wide Selection ei Store X Store Y Store Z +2 +2 +3 +3 Low Price -1 +3 -2 -1 High Quality +3 -1 +3 +1 Convenient Locations +2 +2 +2 +3
  25. 25. Strengths of Multiattribute Models    Looks at a BASIS for attitudes Can provide diagnostic help Can reveal whether consumer perceptions are accurate
  26. 26. Changing Attitudes      Change belief (e.g., change product, advertising, etc.) Change evaluation (e.g., Nakamichi tape decks) Add a dimension (e.g., Bud “born-on” date) Change decision rule (e.g., shift to noncompensatory rule) Change beliefs about competitors (e.g., “Their cars are not made in America”)
  27. 27. Noncompensatory Decision Rules  Lexicographic Rule   Select most important attribute; pick brand that does best on that attribute. In case of tie, go to next most important attribute and so on Elimination by Aspects  Establish cutoff, then select most important attribute; pick brand that meets cutoff on most important attribute; in case of tie, consider next most important attribute and pick brand that meets cutoff on that attribute
  28. 28. Noncompensatory Rules (contd.)  Conjunctive Rule   Establish cutoff levels for all attributes and select brand that meets cutoffs on all attributes Disjunctive Rule  Establish cutoff for all attributes and select brand that meets cutoff on at least one attribute (i.e., brand must have some redeeming feature)
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.